MODU Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

Foreign flagged MODUs choosing to comply with the "Option A" requirements of 33 CFR 143.207(a) must comply with the design and equipment requirements of 46 CFR Part 108, as applicable to the build date of the MODU. 46 CFR Subchapters F & J are not applicable as the paths to those subchapters are located in 46 CFR Part 107 (§107.231(a)), to which Option A MODUs are not subject. 46 CFR Subchapter S applies as the path to that subchapter is located at 46 CFR 108.301.

Option A MODUs will also typically comply with the operating requirements of 46 CFR Part 109, per 33 CFR 146.205(a).

Regulatory paths:
33 CFR 143.207(a) > 46 CFR Part 108 (including requirements of 46 CFR Subchapter S, via §108.301)
33 CFR 146.205(a) > 46 CFR Part 109

Additional regulatory guidance:
Marine Safety: Outer Continental Shelf Activities, COMDTINST 16000.76 (previously CG Marine Safety Manual (MSM) Vol II, Section G), Chapters 1 & 3

Note: With the cancellation of NVIC 3-88, there is no active regulatory guidance allowing the use of NVIC 4-78 (46 CFR 109, Appendix A) for Option A MODUs, as the only path to Appendix A is from 46 CFR Part 107 (§107.211(c) and §107.215(c)(2)).

Published 31Dec2018; updated 28Jun2022 to reflect MSM Vol II changes and clarify the note.

Yes, if the foreign flagged MODU was issued an initial COC prior to June 25, 2014.

On June 25, 2014, NVIC 3-88 was cancelled and the Marine Safety Manual (MSM) Volume II, Section G was updated. With this update, NVIC 4-78 became applicable to foreign flagged MODUs only if it had previously held a U.S. Coast Guard Certificate of Inspection issued under 46 CFR Subchapter "I".

NVIC 4-78 applies to existing U.S. Flagged Mobile Offshore Drilling Units (MODUs) and existing foreign flagged units that meet specific prerequisites as further discussed below. The NVIC is included as Appendix A to 46 CFR Part 109.

"Existing units" are defined as units contracted for which are to be constructed and delivered prior to January 1, 1981.

NVIC 4-78 was historically applied to existing foreign flagged MODUs choosing to be inspected under 33 CFR 143.207(a) and 33 CFR 146.205(a), also known as Option "A". This provision was found in paragraph 3.B.2 of Enclosure (1) to NVIC 3-88, CH-1. Much of the NVIC 3-88, CH-1 content was incorporated into Marine Safety Manual (MSM), Volume II, CH-1, Section G, Chapter 3 (MSM II.G.3) on June 25, 2014, and NVIC 3-88, CH-1 was cancelled at that time.

Current guidance found in Chapter 3 of COMDTINST 16000.76 (previously MSM Vol II, Section G) at G.3.B.1.b (page G3-9) states "Existing MODUs – All existing units will be inspected as in the above paragraph. However, units contracted for before January 3, 1979, and issued a Certificate of Inspection (COI) under 46 Subchapter I [emphasis added] may continue to meet the requirements in force at the time of the COI issuance but must also meet the applicable requirements of 46 Subchapter I-A as specified in Navigation and Vessel Inspection Circular, "Inspection and Certification of Existing Mobile Offshore Drilling Units" (Appendix A of 46 CFR Part 109) until the unit is rebuilt. After a rebuild, the unit must meet the requirements of 46 CFR Subchapter I-A. The definition for REBUILT can be found in 33 CFR 140.10."

While NVIC 3-88, CH-1 allowed all existing units to utilize Appendix A (NVIC 4-78) of 46 CFR 109, the verbiage was modified with incorporation into the MSM to only allow the use of Appendix A by foreign flagged MODUs that were previously an existing U.S. flagged MODU that had been issued a COI under 46 Subchapter I. If a foreign flagged MODU does not meet these prerequisites, the unit can be examined under Option “A” but cannot utilize 46 CFR 109 Appendix A (NVIC 4-78) and would have to use 46 CFR Parts 108 and 109 that are applicable to the build date(s) of the MODU.

Note: MSM Vol II CH-2 and CH-3 did not affect the content that was incorporated and discussed above for CH-1. CH-3 separated sections A through G of MSM Vol II into individual and independent Commandant Instructions with Section G becoming Marine Safety: Outer Continental Shelf Activities, COMDTINST 16000.76.

See the following flowchart for 46 CFR 109, Appendix A applicability. Files in pdf are available for the NVIC 4-78 Flowchart or the NVIC 4-78 Flowchart Print Version (click on the names).

Published 22May2019; updated 28Jun2022 to reflect MSM Vol II changes.

Short answer: A first aid kit, whether a prior CG-approved kit or a newer self-certified to ISO standard kit, does NOT have to be in an unopened condition (i.e., sealed outer wrapper) AND items with expirations can be replaced individually. Read on for more information.

The U.S. Coast Guard published a change in type approval requirements for survival craft equipment as a "final rule" in the Federal Register (FR) via 87 FR 68270 on November 14, 2022, with the rule becoming effective on December 14, 2022. The final rule removed CG type approval requirements for nine types of survival craft equipment, including first aid kits, and replaced them with the requirement that the manufacturer self-certify that the equipment complies with a consensus standard. The Office of Design and Engineering Standards (CG-ENG) summarized the changes via Marine Safety Information Bulletin (MSIB) 07-22, dated November 14, 2022.

First aid kits that were previously required to comply with the type approval requirements of 46 CFR 160.041 now have to comply with ISO 18813:2006, Ships and marine technology - Survival equipment for survival craft and rescue boats. First, we will address first aid kits complying with the referenced ISO standard, and then we will address existing CG-approved kits.

First Aid Kits complying with ISO 18813:2006

ISO 18813:2006, nor USCG regulations related to first aid kits, require the entire kit to be "unopened". As shown in 4.12.1 of the standard, the first aid kit must be packed in a waterproof case that can be "closed tightly after use". 4.12.2 deals with the expirations and how they must be marked on the container or visible through the container.

“4.12.1 The first-aid outfit shall be packed in a waterproof case capable of being closed tightly after use, and the contents shall be approved by the Administration to the appropriate national requirements for the craft in which it is carried. The first-aid outfit shall include the following items, plus any other items required by the Administration:

a. waterproof container;
b. first-aid instructions;
c. analgesic medication - 48 doses minimum;
d. antiseptic preparations - suitable for at least 10 applications;
e. burn preparations - suitable for at least 12 applications;
f. adhesive plasters - 20 minimum in assorted sizes;
g. sterile compression bandage - 10 minimum in assorted sizes;
h. adhesive elastic bandages - 4 m minimum;
i. sterile gauze compresses - 2 minimum;
j. triangular bandages - 2 minimum.

4.12.2 If the first-aid outfit contains expiry-dated items, the date of expiry shall be marked on the outside of the waterproof container, or visible through the container.”

Replacement of individual, expired items is not mentioned in the body of the standard, but it is addressed in Annex A (informative) to the standard: "Maintenance and periodic inspection guidelines". A.2.7 addresses the first aid kit items. Note that A.2.7.1 states that each unit carton within the first aid kit should be in an "intact waterproof package" and A.2.7.2 provides for the individual replacement of expired items.

“A.2.7.1 During periodic shipboard inspections, first-aid outfits not packed in inflatable liferafts should be examined to ensure that they contain all of the items listed in the provided instructions. Each unit carton should be in an intact waterproof package. If it is not, it should be replaced with an equivalent waterproof unit from a supplier of approved first-aid outfits.

NOTE   Standard cellophane-wrapped unit cartons are not waterproof.

A.2.7.2 Any dated medications in the outfit should be replaced during periodic stripping and cleaning of the lifeboat, rescue boat, or rigid liferaft if their expiry date has passed.

NOTE   First-aid outfits packed in inflatable liferafts are inspected during required servicing of the liferaft by an approved service station.”

Existing USCG-Approved First Aid Kits

As stated in the notice of the final rule for the changes to type approval (87 FR 68270), "The Coast Guard is not requiring existing vessels to replace their current kits; however, existing vessels must replace medication and ointments within the kits by their expiration date." (See https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2022-23666/p-186)

Replacement of individual, expired components have been acceptable to maintaining the kit as evidenced by previous information promulgated by the Office of Commercial Vessel Compliance (CG-CVC) in the Top 10 Small Passenger Vessels (Subchapter T) Deficiencies report on their website (excerpt pasted below; see last sentence).

The last publishing of the CG type approval requirements for CG-approved first aid kits can be viewed in the 2022 annual edition of the CFR at 46 CFR Part 160, Subpart 160.041. These previous regulations did not have any specific expiration marking requirements but did specify that individual cartons "shall contain all information required by Federal and State laws" (46 CFR §160.041–4). Separate regulations, such as those in Title 21, Code of Federal Regulations, would stipulate the expiration dates to be marked for medications that are determined by drug product stability testing.

Safety distributors have seen a recent change in the expiration of first aid kit items where some expirations have decreased from 3 years to 1 year. The CG mentioned varied expirations in the FR notice where "The expiration date of OTC [over the counter] medications is typically between one and five years after manufacture." (See https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2022-23666/p-81).

As mentioned in the final rule, and should have been common practice, these previously approved kits can continue to be used if expired items and opened/used cartons are replaced to maintain the kit in 'good condition' and ready to serve the intended purpose.

NOTE: While the FR did not specifically update the First Aid kit verbiage in 33 CFR 144.01-30, CG-ENG is aware and has noted that all of the same guidance applies to units subject to the Lifesaving requirements of 33 CFR Subchapter N, Part 144, Subpart 144.01. First aid kits will no longer be marked as CG-approved after a manufacturer’s “Certificate of Approval” (which provides for the marking of a CG type approval number to a tested and approved product) issued by the CG expires.

Published 19Mar2024.

Is the number of lifeboatmen based on the total number of lifeboats onboard or on the number of lifeboats needed for 100% coverage of persons onboard (POB), since these types of units are required to maintain redundancy in lifeboat capacity?

Short answer: It is based on 100% coverage (but could vary/be increased by the Flag State Administration). Let’s take a further look…

Foreign-flagged units are pretty straightforward in that the Safe Manning Document sets the number of lifeboatmen required by the Administration. Many administrations base this off of the total number of lifeboats onboard.

Let’s look at some of the applicable cites to see the intent/how the minimum number would be determined:

2009 MODU 14.10.6 (14.10.5 before the 2017 amendments) requires certificated persons to be placed in command AND second-in-command of EACH lifeboat. Based on this cite, each lifeboat is required to have 2 lifeboatmen (note that this is not based on the capacity of the lifeboat, but is a straight 2-per lifeboat requirement). A typical drillship example with 6 lifeboats provided, 3 on each side (100% POB coverage on each side), would need 12 lifeboatmen based on the wording in this cite. The majority of Administrations choose to use the formula of 2 lifeboatmen multiplied by the total number of lifeboats to obtain the required number of lifeboatmen to list on their Minimum Safe Manning documents.

But wait, 2009 MODU 14.10.5 (14.10.4 before the 2017 amendments) requires sufficient certificated persons onboard to launch and operate the survival craft TO WHICH PERSONNEL ARE ASSIGNED. 2009 MODU 14.10.6 works in concert with 14.10.5. This puts an interesting twist to our 'typical' drillship example, and the station bill will need to be consulted to determine the appropriate number of lifeboatmen based on the boats to be used. A typical drillship meets the design and equipment requirements of 100% capacity on each side (2009 MODU 10.3.1) with 3 lifeboats on each side, but common practice across the industry is to assign personnel to the 4 forward lifeboats as their primary abandonment location/station.

Some examples of lifeboatmen numbers that would meet the intent in our drillship example, in accordance with 2009 MODU 14.10.5 & 14.10.6:
   • 3 lifeboats assigned (100% POB coverage), port or starboard boats (depending on scenario) = 6 lifeboatmen required
   • 4 forward lifeboats assigned (exceeds 100% POB coverage, but personnel are assigned to 4 boats) = 8 lifeboatmen required

2009 SOLAS III/10.4 helps to check the intent and is a little clearer than the MODU Codes, as it uses “each survival craft to be used” in the certificated person(s) requirement (2009 SOLAS was cited as that was the edition applicable when the 2009 MODU Code was adopted, although the cite and the verbiage is the same in the 2020 Consolidated Edition of SOLAS).

Essentially, an Administration that requires 12 lifeboatmen would cover most any muster/abandonment assignments scenario on our typical drillship example. If an Administration requires only 6 lifeboatmen on our example, the station bill/abandonment station assignments should reflect that arrangement (6 lifeboatmen wouldn’t be sufficient if the 4 forward boats were being utilized).

Note: If an Administration requires more lifeboatmen than the station bill/boat assignments require, the number stipulated on the Minimum Safe Manning document MUST be adhered to. If the station bill/boat assignments require more than the Administration stipulates, the required number set forth in the applicable MODU code must be complied with.

1989 MODU 14.9.5 and 14.9.4 are the same as the 2009 MODU cites discussed above.

The MODU Code (1979) does not specifically address the requirement related to manning of survival craft and the requirement will be stipulated by the Administration on the Minimum Safe Manning document. Note that 'emergency procedures' are located within Chapter 10 of the 79 Code, compared to Chapter 14 of the 89 & 09 Codes.

U.S. requirements follow a similar approach for MODUs. 46 CFR 109.323(c) requires a person to be placed in charge of each survival craft TO BE USED. §109.323(c)(1) requires them to be trained/certificated for those duties and §109.323(c)(2) requires the second-in-command for lifeboats permitted to carry MORE THAN 40 persons (41 POB and higher). Note that the biggest difference is that the lifeboat capacity determines when the second lifeboatman is required.

As supplementary guidance to the regulations, CG Marine Safety Manual Vol III/B.2.B.2.f discusses lifeboatmen and when/how many are required and uses the statement "each survival craft to be used" as well. This specific MSM cite is for mechanically-propelled vessels of 100 GRT or more, but is referenced as footnote 15 in B.2.O.1 (MODU sample manning).

Conclusion: Both IMO and U.S. requirements are aimed at providing lifeboatmen for the boats needed to accommodate evacuation of the persons onboard (100% of POB capacity), not providing lifeboatmen coverage for the redundant boats.

Published 14Dec2018; updated 28Jun2022 to reflect MSM Vol III changes and 2009 MODU Code amendments.

Short answer: Once every 12 consecutive months.

Discussion: All elements of the EEP must be exercised through a drill or series of drills on an annual basis.

33 CFR 146.125(c)(1): "At least once a year, all the elements of the Emergency Evacuation Plan (EEP) under §146.140 relating to the evacuation of personnel from the facility must be exercised through a drill or a series of drills. The drill(s) must exercise all of the means and procedures listed in the EEP for each circumstance and condition described in the EEP under §146.140(d)(9)."

The wording is for a "year", rather than a "calendar year", and should be interpreted to mean a 12 consecutive month period. The EEP drill requirements were not part of the proposed rule (24Dec1987), but were added in the final rule (18May1989) as a response to industry comments as published at 54 FR 21568 where it was described as "annually":

"Four comments stated that the EEP regulations should contain a requirement for periodic evacuation drills. The comments stated that periodic interactive drills that test and exercise all the key elements of the EEP are needed to verify that the plan continues to be viable.
The Coast Guard agrees that the periodic drills are necessary to ensure that all personnel are familiar with the EEP. Therefore, a new § 146.125(c) has been added to require that abbreviated EEP drills be held monthly and that a comprehensive drill exercising all elements of the EEP be conducted annually. Also, a new § 146.140(e)(3) has been added to require the operator to ensure that the drills are conducted."

While some USCG operational regulations are specifically worded as a 12-month period, the majority of the types of USCG regulations are categorized as annual or "once in each year" and are treated as a consecutive 12-month period for compliance purposes. A once per "calendar year" requirement could give an extended window of time that would be outside of the intent of periodic training. As an example, a drill in Jan2019 followed by the next drill in Dec2020 could satisfy a once per calendar year requirement, but would clearly exceed the intent of annual, or once a year, training with nearly 24-months passing between drills.

Published 07Oct2021.

Short answer: Elements are the components that make up the EEP and yes, the annual drill includes "all" equipment that is listed in the EEP.

Discussion: The phrase "all elements of the Emergency Evacuation Plan" as listed in the emergency drill requirements has often been questioned as to what it really means. Let’s take a look…

33 CFR 146.125(c)(1): "At least once a year, all the elements of the Emergency Evacuation Plan (EEP) under §146.140 relating to the evacuation of personnel from the facility must be exercised through a drill or a series of drills. The drill(s) must exercise all of the means and procedures listed in the EEP for each circumstance and condition described in the EEP under §146.140(d)(9)." [emphasis added]

The term "element" was added to the regulation with the final rule (published 18Mar1989) by the USCG in an effort to address industry comments to the proposed rule (published 24Dec1987).

Please note that the first sentence in the cite states "elements of the EEP under §146.140 relating to the evacuation of personnel from the facility". The requirements of the EEP relating to personnel evacuation are detailed in §146.140(d)(9) through (12) and include recognized circumstances that would place the facility or its personnel in jeopardy and for which a mass evacuation would be recommended. Fires, blowouts, approaching hurricanes and ice floes are specifically mentioned as examples of circumstances that would recommend an evacuation and collisions are another circumstance that is often included in typical EEPs that would initiate an evacuation.

The second sentence in the referenced cite states that "the drill(s) must exercise all of the means and procedures listed in the EEP for each circumstance" [emphasis added] to further stipulate what is required to satisfy the drill requirement.

Means and procedures are listed at §146.140(d)(12) as those for:

1. retrieving persons from the water during an evacuation;
2. transferring persons from the facility to the designated type of evacuation method (e.g. designated standby vessels, lifeboats or other evacuation craft);
3. retrieving persons from the evacuation craft that they were transferred to in the previous requirement; and
4. the ultimate evacuation of all persons to land, another facility or other location reasonably out of danger for the specific circumstance for the evacuation.

The District Eight OCS OCMI (responsible for the OCS activities on the U.S. OCS in the Gulf of Mexico) has interpreted §146.125(c)(1) "to mean that all lifeboats aboard a facility, shall, at a minimum, be launched with assigned lifeboat crew in order to fulfill the requirements of the annual emergency evacuation drill" in section 5, paragraph a, of D8(OCS) Policy Letter 01-2020, dated 19May2020. The policy letter goes on to discuss alternatives to this requirement in paragraphs 5.d through 5.f.

In the context of lifeboats/capsules, some have questioned if there is a need to test "all" of the boats for units or facilities with multiple boats, or if demonstrating the means and procedures with one, or a sampling of boats, would satisfy the intent. Note that the referenced cite states "all of the means and procedures" and the D8 OCS OCMI has reiterated this in Policy Letter 01-2020.

Also note that while the focus tends to be on lifeboats with this annual requirement, the cite requires exercise of all of the means and procedures for each circumstance that are stipulated in the EEP.

Published 07Oct2021.

Short answer: Fixed OCS Facilities and FOFs are required to demonstrate OSFR and MODUs are required to carry a COFR for a tank vessel or a non-tank vessel based on its operation.

Discussion: The requirements for an OSFR are found in 30 CFR 553 and the requirements for a COFR are found in 33 CFR 138.

This is based on 30 CFR 553.10:
(a) This part applies to any COF [Covered offshore facility] on any lease or permit issued or on any RUE [Right-of-use and easement] granted under the OCSLA or applicable State law.
(b) For a pipeline COF that extends onto land, this part applies to that portion of the pipeline lying seaward of the first accessible flow shut-off device on land.

Covered Offshore Facility (COF) in 30 CFR 553.3 means a facility:
(1) That includes any structure and all its components (including wells completed at the structure and the associated pipelines), equipment, pipeline or device (other than a vessel or other than a pipeline or deepwater port licensed under the Deepwater Port Act of 1974 (33 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.)) used for exploring for, drilling for, or producing oil or for transporting oil from such facilities. This includes a well drilled from a mobile offshore drilling unit (MODU) and the associated riser and well control equipment from the moment a drill shaft or other device first touches the seabed for purposes of exploring for, drilling for, or producing oil but it does not include the MODU; and…,

33 CFR 138.20(b) states:
For the purposes of applying the evidence of financial responsibility required under OPA 90 and this subpart and the limits of liability set forth in subpart B of this part, and in addition to any OPA 90 offshore facility evidence of financial responsibility requirements that may apply under 30 CFR part 553, a mobile offshore drilling unit is treated as -
   (1) A tank vessel when it is being used as an offshore facility; and
   (2) A vessel other than a tank vessel when it is not being used as an offshore facility.

33 CFR 138.230(d) states:
Offshore facilities. The OPA 90 limit of liability or offshore facilities other than deepwater ports, including for any offshore pipelines, is set forth at 30 CFR 553.702.

Published 08Oct2020; cites updated 01Jul2022 to reflect 01Dec2021 amendments to 33 CFR Part 138.

A MODU operating on DP and attached to the seabed is considered underway, not making way, and restricted in the ability to maneuver.

Lighting configuration:
   - Three all-round lights in a vertical line where they can best be seen. The highest and lowest of these lights shall be red and the middle light shall be white.

Note: Masthead lights, sidelights and sternlight are NOT required, as the MODU is not making way and anchor lights are NOT required, as the MODU is not considered as "anchored".

Day shape configuration:
   - Three shapes in a vertical line where they can best be seen. The highest and lowest of these shapes shall be balls and the middle one a diamond.

See the follow-on question below, where additional lights and shapes may be required.
 

Are there additional navigation light requirements that apply to a MODU operating on dynamic positioning (DP), while obstructions exist in addition to the drilling equipment (e.g. ROV ops, subsea ops with the heave-compensated crane, etc.)?

Yes. Due to additional operations where obstructions exist to one side, the MODU may indicate the sides on which other vessels may and may not pass.

Lighting configuration:
   - Restricted maneuverability lighting as described above (drilling only), PLUS;
   - Two all-round red lights in a vertical line to indicate the side on which the obstruction exists; and
   - Two all-round green lights in a vertical line to indicate the side on which another vessel may pass.

Day shape configuration:
   - Restricted maneuverability shapes as described above (drilling only), PLUS;
   - Two balls in a vertical line to indicate the side on which the obstruction exists; and
   - Two diamonds in a vertical line to indicate the side on which another vessel may pass.

MODU navigation lighting is also discussed on the USCG Navigation Center’s FAQ page by clicking here.

Published 14May2019.

Short Answer: Yes.

Discussion: (Note: This answer is based on conventional incandescent-type light assemblies. Manufacturer’s instructions should be consulted for LED lanterns or retrofits to ensure compliance with advertised/intended characteristics and range.)

Part 1: Leveling

The "ridges" of the Fresnel lens found on obstruction lights serve a very important purpose. These ridges condense the light to the center of the lens and send out a type of light beam to meet the required range.

If the light is not level the focal plane will either be above or below the vessel. Either condition could reduce the required range, resulting in non-compliance with regulations and not meeting charted characteristics. See the graphical depiction below.

The leveling of the lantern can be checked via the built-in bubble levels of some lanterns or with the method displayed below (utilized by U.S. Coast Guard short-range aids to navigation technicians).

Part 2: Focusing

There is another issue, especially on larger lights, that has to do with the "focus" of the light. For the light to be in focus, the lamp needs to be lined up with the center of the Fresnel lens. To check this, there are sighting marks (an "O" and "X" pair or two "X" pair) marked at 180° increments on the outside of the lens. When looking through the "O" to the "X" on the opposite side (180°) of the lens, the lamp should fall between the two sighting marks with the sighting marks aligned. The most common issue with the focus on certain model lights is when the bracket for the lamp changer mounts is installed upside down, which moves the lamp out of the focal plane of the lens.

The graphic below illustrates how to verify that a lantern is properly focused.

Published 19Apr2021.

Short Answer: Yes, in most circumstances.

Discussion: While USCG regulations do not explicitly mention DP systems, the topic has been discussed in numerous CG policies, guidance and legal reviews.

Note: Additional case-by-case reviews and determinations may have been made by the CG in regard to DP as propulsion, but only those that have been available to the public are discussed in this explanation.

NVC 8-68 first addressed this issue when released on November 15, 1968, due to "an increasing number of non-self-propelled units being equipped with positioning machinery, steering aids and propulsion assist units." In this NVC, the CG policy on tunnel type "thrusters" and "kickers" used solely for transiting locks and/or canals would not be considered as a basis for classifying a vessel as self-propelled. However, the NVC went on to say that "vessels equipped with directional maneuvering equipment and/or substantial propulsion assist units will normally be considered as self-propelled vessels" regardless of if a towing vessel was employed in the operation.

NVC 8-68 was cancelled by Change 1 to Marine Safety Manual Volume II (MSM II) on July 7, 2014, and the language of the policy was condensed and included at MSM II A.6.F (pages A6-6 and A6-7). The policy was modified for vessels equipped with directional moving equipment to note that "this would include dynamic positioning (DP)". MSM II A was moved to COMDTINST 16000.70 on Sep 20, 2021, but the policy remained the same:

"To further clarify, unidirectional tunnel type "thrusters" and "kickers" used solely for transiting locks and/or canals would NOT be considered a basis for classifying a vessel as self-propelled. Vessels equipped with directional maneuvering equipment and/or substantial propulsion assist units will normally be considered self-propelled (this would include dynamic positioning (DP)); notwithstanding the fact that a towing vessel may be employed in the operation."

CG-094 (Judge Advocate General and Chief Counsel) issued a memorandum to CG-5 (Assistant Commandant for Marine Safety, Security and Stewardship) on February 11, 2011, with the subject of "Potential Legal Issues Associated with Vessels Employing Dynamic Positioning Systems" and the redacted memo was included as Appendix I to the Report of Investigation for the MODU DEEPWATER HORIZON casualty. The memo thoroughly discusses the law and history surrounding vessels and the classification of being self-propelled. At paragraph 23, the memo concludes that:

"Under current law, a watercraft operating with a DP System is an underway, self-propelled vessel, and subject to all the regulatory requirements of "traditional" vessels."

The USCG Marine Safety Center (MSC) states that "DP systems are propulsion control systems and are considered as vital systems" in section 4 of MSC Plan Review Guidance Procedure No. E2-24, dated December 14, 2021. The previous revision of the procedure, dated November 9, 2011, essentially stated the same thing, although in less direct verbiage. MSC Technical Note 02-11, CH-1, dated December 11, 2020, states in paragraph 2.b that "DP systems are considered to be a vital component of the propulsion control system" and goes on to say that "DP systems are routinely used as the primary maneuvering system during critical operations".

Frequently asked questions are posted on both the NAVCEN and OCSNCOE websites that state that a vessel that is using DP to maintain position is considered as underway, not making way in regard to the Navigation Rules and should be marked by navigation lighting or dayshapes to indicate that condition.

While a DP system may have the primary purpose of station keeping or proceeding along a specific path (usually for an industrial purpose, such as pipe laying or cable laying), the CG has considered systems that have the ability to move and maneuver a vessel as a means of self-propulsion for more than 50 years and has reiterated that DP systems fall within that category.

Published 09Jan2024.